It's the least bad option for generating the base load. Although properly managed wind or hydro can deliver some, it's usually not enough.
That being said, I do think some of the fears are justified. It's about tradeoffs: do you want a low level of constant pollution (coal), or a catastrophic disaster once every 100 years (nuclear). Then there is also the waste, which is "solved" only if you permanently sacrifice some area, and hope geological movements or underground water don't touch it. So it's should definitely be an important part of the mix, but the risks shouldn't be dismissed.
France can serve as a positive example. Imo they are doing energy policy right.
Yeah, I'm not very confident that we managed to eliminate mismanagement. It's a constant threat in any organization. Luckily most companies don't deal with nuclear materials.