Yes, I've been programming in Lisp and Racket for the past twenty years and recently switched to Go. The main reason was the availability of a large number of packages and the general tooling for Go. So far, I'm quite happy with my choice. Productivity is slightly less than with Racket, but outweighed by the small size of the executables, easier deployment, and more 3rd party libraries. Of course, I'm missing a lot of features that pretty much any Lisp offers, but the simplicity and static typing does overall have many advantages.
Since you mention Clojure: That's useless for me, because it runs on the JVM. One reason to use Go is exactly that it produces static, self-contained executables that don't require any heavy infrastructure.
If you care about a rich standard library, and static self-contained executables, I would strongly suggest Crystal. I have used both Go and Crystal, and the latter is much more productive as well as simpler. It’s standard library is richer. See, for example, the things you can do with strings with the provided functions. I used to love Go. But after some time the verbosity got tiring. I moved to Crystal, and there is nothing I miss from Go. Two big caveats: 1. I dont work in a big team. 2. My main use case is a web-backend.
For small executables, check out Chicken Scheme. For static typing, see Typed Racket (though Chicken Scheme is also moving in the direction of gradual typing, if I recall correctly).
Since you mention Clojure: That's useless for me, because it runs on the JVM. One reason to use Go is exactly that it produces static, self-contained executables that don't require any heavy infrastructure.