The Names Voters Loved Before America Did

Here is a time capsule. In 2014 and 2015, visitors to this site began rating baby names — and the names they rated hardest were, by the standards of the birth charts, nobodies. Oaklyn collected 242 votes in an era when she was given to 8 babies a year and ranked #4,238. Navy drew 133 votes while sitting at #2,017. These voters weren't reflecting the chart. Were they predicting it?

A decade later, we can score the prediction. Take every name first rated in 2014–2015 that went on to collect at least 50 votes — 312 names, 340 name-and-gender cases — and compare its birth-chart rank in the year the voting started with its best rank in 2019–2025. The scoreboard:

• 177 cases climbed at least 200 chart places.
• 37 fell at least 200 places.
• Three out of four (251 of 340) finished higher than they started.

The names the crowd found first

Read Oaklyn's row again: from 8 babies to 557, from the depths of the chart to the edge of the top 500, and the voters were there a decade early. Navy: 52 babies when the voting began, 919 in 2025. Brixton: 84 boys in 2014, 501 at his 2021 best. The table is girls-heavy with two boys' rows — and note Onyx and Baylor appearing for both sexes: the votes attach to the name itself, so a name the crowd loved shows up on whichever chart it climbed.

And the most extreme case isn't in the table at all, because she can't be scored: Harlyn, 259 votes, first rated in October 2014 — a year in which she has no birth row at all (fewer than 5 babies, below the reporting floor). The crowd rated a name the national data literally could not yet see.

The honest footnote: Kinsley

The most-voted name of the entire era is Kinsley — 262 votes, first rated September 11, 2014, when she ranked #132 with 2,431 babies. She climbed to #57 by 2021 with 3,879 babies — a solid rise, and a 60% increase in babies, but "only" 75 chart places. She doesn't clear this table's 200-place bar. Instructive, that: the crowd's single biggest favorite was already near the top when they found her, so she had the least room to run. The prescience was in the deep cuts, not the favorite.

Was it luck?

Three cautions, because this deserves them. First, the votes are totals: we know when a name's first vote arrived (that's what "first rated 2014" means), not when each of its 50+ votes was cast — voters kept arriving over the years, including after some climbs had begun. Second, people rate names they're excited about, and in 2014 the exciting names were disproportionately the new coinages — the crowd was rating the frontier, and frontiers are where climbs happen. Third, 37 of their heavily rated names fell 200+ places anyway. This was not a crystal ball.

But 177 rises against 37 falls is not a coin flip either. What the ratings captured, years before the birth data did, was desire: thousands of people saying "this one" about names America hadn't met yet. Desire is a leading indicator. The charts just take a decade to agree.

Our advice: when you're hunting for a name that's about to rise, watch what people are rating, not what they're using. A name with hundreds of votes and a four-digit birth rank is a name the culture has already chosen in principle. Kinsley showed the shape of it: Kinsley — and the current crowd favorites sit beside the most popular girl baby names 2025.

See name recommendations based on your last name

Source: U.S. Social Security Administration · Data through 2025 · Updated 2026