Actually, most polls show Bush's main strength is his leadership. I'll put the link to a recent USA Today/CNN/etc poll at the end of this post; look for his numbers in the "strong and decisive leader" part towards the end.
But I hear what you are saying. I tried to address this in a different thread about the way both parties try to tear down the opposing party's leader. But it bothers me that while the righties got in a lather about Clinton's BJ by Monica, the Dems are attacking America's (yes, Bush is our president and thus represents America) involvement in Iraq.
It just seems that in time of war (and most libs were very vocal in America's military action in Afghanistan), Dems are so opposed that they undermine the military mission. Yes, Vietnam was a bad thing and the US shouldn't have got in it last time, but that doesn't mean the Left is right this time.
The same Dems who are protesting today are the same Dems who were 100% against President Reagan's success in the cold war. Yet, look at what that accomplished; we, and the world, are far safer today with the break up of the Soviet Union.
The Dems were on the wrong side of history that time. Now, it seems that they are hoping for the worse in Iraq, simply to get their guy elected.
The same people who say Bush has used propaganda to position the US in the war on terrorism are the same people using propaganda to undermine the military's success; of course, they do not realize (I hope) the harm they are doing to our nation's chance to survive the next attacks. But then, they'll just say I'm using propaganda, right?
You point out the 50-50 split (which is actually closer to 60-40 right now), but if the Repubs were rallying the discontent and hatred in WWII that the Left is right now, we would have never entered that fight and England would have a decidedly Prussian slant in 2004......
Here is that poll:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/usatodaypolls.htm