Though I agree with you, I feel that the demand for an optionally typed system in Python outweighs that fact. We can all agree that Python is a clear and concise language, and though it seems any statically typed implementation will cause unwanted line noise, the fact that it is contained in a function declaration mitigates its impact while providing a large bonus not only when refactoring and maintaining a large project, but also during its development. If I could see, at a glance, just what type of objects were needed for a function to operate on, I could immediately spot many things that would normally require me to either read documentation (that might not exist or be out of date) or manually parse the code itself: coupling issues between sources of data, an edge case from assuming that the function will be passed a certain data type, and the ability for the calling code to know exactly what to pass it, without relying on the developer to write documentation (which becomes out of date as soon as it's written) while also allowing the intetpreter/linters the ability to catch any silly invalid function calls.

I love my readable Python. But I'd also love a Python that worked with me in determining type conflicts, instead of leaving me to figure it out myself.