If Racket people "hate types", you'd have a hard time explaining the existence of Typed Racket, or that some of the most cited research on types is by one of Racket's creators.
But please, don't let facts get in the way. (-:
As for whether other people in the racket community like typed racket, the answer is clearly yes. if you look at recent work on racket, much of it integrates with or its motivated by, typed racket.
And there are a number of us who work on it currently. Have a look at the list of authors in the documentation.
Sam, creator of Typed Racket
If you look at the "Start Quickly" section of racket-lang.org, right there is an example of Typed Racket. Your claim that it's "not advertised" would make sense if they'd somehow hidden it from that list.
There are several people contributing to Typed Racket. See the different names on the papers.
The documentation could be better. Sam's gotten some flames from me about that. But all documentation for just about everything could be better. (I'm hardly one to throw stones.) It usually takes about 10 years for a project's documentation to reach a state of suitable quality -- so comparing against the documentation for Java or Python or even Racket is really not fair. It just takes a long time to get this material together.
If you like Typed Racket -- which I do encourage you to study more -- do send mail to the Racket list. It's very active, and by asking questions, not only do you learn, you help others learn, and you give Sam and the others cues as to what it is they should be adding to the documentation.