It never really made sense to say "we are going to phase out nuclear entirely" instead of "we'll focus on how to build safer, cheaper and more efficient nuclear".
The decision to go off nuclear was capricious and it seems that the speed with which sentiment is changing only proves this.
Nuclear wins in every first principle analysis, it requires the least amount of mining, the least amount of land, and produces the least amount of damage to the atmosphere and to local air quality.
That it did not happen is a failure in planning. Eisenhower over-promised when he said energy to cheap to meter, but the technology certainty has and had amazing potential.
In the 1960s they developed so many amazing reactors in such a short time, and then starting in the 1970 basically all progress stopped. The NASA Kilopower was the first new reactor in the US for like 40+ years.
Nuclear unfortunately was invented in WW2 and has been dominate by the military both in terms of access and in terms of usage. The only reason we have PWRs for civilian production is because PWR make sense for submarines and was commercialized based on that investment.
Renewables don't work for base load yet.
But we can't have nice apparently. We rather waste billions on some dumb geological storage rather then just use basic logic. Misinformation and politics are the only reason for these deep geological repositories.