Sure, there's risks of nuclear meltdowns but we've already advanced far enough since Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi.

Sure, but those risks are absolutely minimal.

Chernobyl, yeah, that was a disaster. But it was caused by bad Commie engineering, bad Commie management and Commies need to not admit they made a mistake.

But outside of that, there's been virtually no problems. Three Mile Island is frequently cited among nutters as an example of how dangerous nuclear can be despite multiple studies showing there were no significant health impacts as a result of it and it is the worst one (I believe) that has happened in the US. As for Fukushima, yeah it is quite possibly the 2nd worst nuclear disaster the world has seen (behind Chernobyl) but you had an earthquake and tsunami directly hitting an ancient reaction. And even then, if you look at the actual UN report on it, you'll see that the health effects are again likely not going to be that bad (outside of potentially 2 groups, the plant workers who had high exposure and very young kids who lived near the reactor). The following is a direct quote from the aforementioned report (emphasis mine):

The doses to the general public, both those incurred during the first year and estimated for their lifetimes, are generally low or very low. No discernible increased incidence of radiation-related health effects are expected among exposed members of the public or their descendants. The most important health effect is on mental and social well-being, related to the enormous impact of the earthquake, tsunami and nuclear accident, and the fear and stigma related to the perceived risk of exposure to ionizing radiation. Effects such as depression and post-traumatic stress symptoms have already been reported. Estimation of the occurrence and severity of such health effects are outside the Committee’s remit

So, yeah, for the average person decades of "Nuclear bad! Nuclear evil!" may well have a bigger health impact than the actual radiation.