Maybe the Nobel prize winners are still preparing their endorsement, but I doubt it. Obama himself got the Nobel Peace prize in 2009, and no one wants to talk about that. My guess is that the laureates are all annoyed that the status of their prizes has been devalued by giving a peace prize to a reckless warmonger.
One very famous Nobel physics prize winner writes:
As it happens, I live in a strongly Republican state [Texas] where, because of the wonderful workings of the electoral college, my vote for president can have no effect. So I will allow myself the luxury of expressing my disappointment with Barack Obama, by voting for all Democratic candidates, except that I will not vote for either candidate for president.Yes, a lot of the leftist elite is very disappointed with Obama.
Update: Sixty-eight Nobel Prize winners have just endorsed Obama. Their main argument is that Obama favors more federal spending than Romney. There is no mention of anything Obama has actually done about global warming, stem cells, or any of their other favorite boogeymen.
Scientific American explains:
“In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem,” President Ronald Reagan argued in his 1981 inaugural address. “Government is the problem.” This antiregulatory-antiscience alliance largely defines the political parties today and helps to explain why, according to a 2009 survey, nine out of 10 scientists who identified with a major political party said they were Democrats.The article credits Mitt Romney for endorsing scientific views, but calls him anti-science anyway because he is reluctant to spend trillions of dollars trying to control CO2 emissions.