I haven't seen the movie, but from some of the reviews I think the right made it out to be more than it was. For one IMO it sounds like it was made to confront terrorism and anti war campaigns.
Here is from Imdb.
Death of a President" is a truly original and intriguing 'future documentary' about an event that hasn't happened yet. It is a reflection on the events surrounding the October 2007 assassination of George W. Bush in a Chicago hotel.
That future time is portrayed with an escalation of the anti-war fervor and a growing concern over the dangers posed by North Korea.
The film flips between staged scenes, real footage & documentary style interviews. It does a fine job of seamlessly blending those pieces to create a very plausible "precreation".
It is interesting watching this film on October 9th, 2006... a day which began with news of North Korea's first nuclear test. The first twenty minutes of the film are dotted with mentions of that scenario.
There are some chilling scenes in this film... especially early on, when you get a real sense of the protesters being contained and beaten down by Chicago police in full riot gear.
After a political speech in the hotel, the President is ushered down a standard meet-and-greet rope-line. It is at this point that the film lives up to its name. Shots are fired and one of the most frenzied scenes of any film this year ensues. Bush is thrown into a waiting limo, which speeds off to the nearest hospital. The crowd at the rope line is panicked beyond recognition. The FBI launches into gear. The media machine revs its engines. And the Chicago skyline lights the night air as an eerie sense of history-in-the-making takes hold.
Later that night, newscasters announce the death of George W. Bush and the film transposes into an FBI procedural... A virtual whodunit for us viewers. It feels very much like a David Mamet plot crossed with an Oliver Stone concept. It truly is a wonderfully imaginative idea played out with great skill and cinematic artistry.
***
OK - The secondary question in reviewing this film is this... Is it wrong? Is it morally questionable to have such a premise be the focal point of a film? Is it in bad taste?
Well, I have always been one to follow Roger Ebert's mandate that, "It is not always what a film is about, but how it is about it." I try not to pass judgment on the subject, but on the skill of the film itself.
However, this is a very brazen subject. Even for a Bush-hating liberal like me, this approaches the line, if indeed it doesn't cross it. It comes dangerously close to going too far.
That being said, I think it stops short of that line and delivers a legitimate scenario that merits people's attention. I believe this film earns the right to touch on this subject. It is a quality film and should not be thought of as a sensationalistic attempt to shock audiences.
***
Death of a President (2006)
Good call GIRLS! 
