Heck, look at all that FactoryFactoryFactory stuff you have to deal with when you want to swap out core parts of a framework - you end up with config files and XML and you have to make sure the guy who made the original framework designed it to allow you to change the part you want to change with your modular swap... in a dynamic language? Monkey patch. It's ugly, but it works.

Heck, look at serialization. If you want to serialize/deserialize static objects, you need metadata that includes the types of everything - stuff like XSD in XML. Dynamic languages don't need that stuff, which is part of the modern popularity of JSON... Javascript and its buddies just play nicer with JSON. I actually wish there was a popular simplified analogue to XSD for Json because I actually miss the ease of serializing into objects that you get using XML/XSD in C# or JSON in Javascript.

The dynamic-ish nature of exceptions that seem like an unholy abominatable hole in the type-system in static languages (or a source of unending-agony in Java's checked exceptions) suddenly fit nicely into a dynamic-typed language paradigm. Python embraces a "easier to ask forgiveness than permission" approach, throwing exceptions willy nilly and it makes nice clean code.

Plus, working in a dynamically typed language heavily discourages premature optimization because you already threw performance out the window.

But yeah, you're basically working without a net, and that kinda sucks.